Controversies in carotid stenting

Steve Taylor, Francisco Alcocer, William D. Jordan*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Endovascular therapies are now commonly used in many vascular sites. However, the role for carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) remains an unproven therapy with some potential benefits. Initial results of CAS were worse than the surgical standard of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and did not meet American Heart Association guidelines. However, recent improvements have resulted in improved stroke morbidity rate that may approach that of CEA. Specifically, the embolic problem associated with CAS has been reduced with embolic protection devices, but the ultimate effect of these protection devices remains uncertain. Initial comparison studies of CAS to CEA showed an unacceptably high stroke morbidity rate in the CAS group. As a result, multiple randomized clinical trials have been initiated to compare the results of CAS with embolic protection to that of CEA. While these studies are underway, the authors advocate a careful application of CAS to be used as a complementary tool for the carotid surgeon to use in special circumstances when CEA cannot be undertaken with acceptable morbidity. Furthermore, since the reported stroke morbidity rate of CAS exceeds the AHA recommendation for treatment of asymptomatic patients, most nonsurgical patients with asymptomatic disease should be treated with medical therapy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)79-87
Number of pages9
JournalVascular and Endovascular Surgery
Volume37
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Controversies in carotid stenting'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this